VZCZCXRO6381
PP RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHBW RUEHDA RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA
RUEHLN RUEHLZ RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHTRO RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUCNDT #0478/01 1502342
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 292342Z MAY 08
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4351
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHXK/ARAB ISRAELI COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 USUN NEW YORK 000478 
 
SIPDIS 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV PTER KWBG KPAL SY LE IS PA
SUBJECT: MIDDLE EAST: UNSC MEMBERS WELCOME REGIONAL PEACE 
INITIATIVES 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  The UN Security Council held its monthly 
Middle East meeting on May 28.  UNSCO Robert Serry briefed in 
a public session, and Council members subsequently discussed 
the issue in closed consultations.  Serry welcomed "fragile" 
progress on the Israeli-Syrian, Lebanese, and 
Israeli-Palestinian tracks, which he credited to the expanded 
role of regional actors, but said these gains could be easily 
reversed absent intensified efforts on the Annapolis track 
and fruition of the Egyptian-led efforts on Gaza.  As usual, 
most delegations condemned rocket attacks from Gaza into 
Israel and criticized "disproportionate" Israeli military 
responses.  Six delegations, including France, joined Serry 
in calling Israel's closure of Gaza "collective punishment." 
Several delegations also expressed concern that the Annapolis 
process had not yet yielded positive results on the ground, 
criticizing in particular continued Israeli settlement 
activity and construction of the separation barrier, but Amb 
Wolff cautioned them not to mistake the confidentiality of 
talks for lack of progress.  Costa Rica and Panama called 
explicitly for international engagement with Hamas, while 
France said it was "ready to support any efforts to 
encourage" Hamas to accept the Quartet conditions.  All 
delegations welcomed the Doha Agreement signed by Lebanese 
leaders as well as the election of Michel Suleiman as 
President of Lebanon.  Several delegations questioned the 
utility of the monthly Middle East meetings if the UNSC 
remains unable to agree on an outcome.  End Summary. 
 
Serry: Better Month than Usual 
------------------------------ 
 
¶2. (SBU) UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace 
Process (UNSCO) Robert Serry briefed the Council during a 
public session on May 28.  (Note: A transcript of his remarks 
was e-mailed to IO/UNP and NEA/IPA. End Note.)  Emphasizing 
the new regional dynamic, Serry welcomed "fragile" progress 
on three tracks -- Israeli-Syrian, Israeli-Palestinian, and 
the Lebanese dialogue culminating in the Doha Agreement and 
the election of Michel Suleiman as President.  He made four 
main observations:  1) Egyptian efforts to achieve calm in 
Gaza are very important and deserve support, 2) progress must 
be intensified on the Annapolis track, and the parties must 
be pressed to intensify cooperation and meet Roadmap 
commitments, 3) regional leadership on issues like 
Israeli-Syrian peace and internal Lebanese politics should be 
commended and supported, and 4) the SYG remains committed to 
the full implementation of all relevant UNSCRs and to a just, 
lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East.  During 
the closed consultations, Serry described in detail the 
impact of the lack of fuel and water in response to questions 
about the humanitarian situation in Gaza.  While noting the 
counterproductive attacks on the crossings, he said resulting 
Israeli measures "amounted to collective punishment."  He 
argued that restoration of calm in Gaza is a prerequisite for 
restoring relations between Gaza and the West Bank and for 
progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track. 
 
Gaza: No to Rockets and Closure 
------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) Most delegations condemned both rocket fire from 
Gaza into Israel as well as "disproportionate" Israeli 
military responses.  France, Russia, Libya, South Africa, 
Indonesia, and Vietnam characterized Israel's closure of Gaza 
as "collective punishment," and along with several other 
delegations, called for an immediate re-opening of the Gaza 
crossing points.  Several European delegations also condemned 
in particular recent Hamas attacks on the crossing points, 
which they said only serve to hurt the Palestinian people. 
South Africa expressed great concern about the humanitarian 
situation in Gaza, in particular the shortage of water and 
lack of sewage treatment, and asked UNSCO Serry to become 
more involved in finding solutions to these problems.  Most 
delegations also expressed support for Egyptian efforts to 
broker a cease-fire in Gaza between Israel and Hamas. 
 
Whither Annapolis? 
------------------ 
 
¶4. (SBU) Several delegations expressed concern that the 
Annapolis process had not yet yielded positive results on the 
ground, criticizing in particular continued Israeli 
settlement activity and construction of the separation 
barrier.  China, South Africa, the UK, and Belgium called for 
practical steps to demonstrate progress on the Annapolis 
track.  Libya was the most pessimistic, decrying a lack of 
"any progress in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations" and 
arguing that more donor meetings are insufficient to address 
the situation in Gaza, which they called the "worst crime 
 
USUN NEW Y 00000478  002 OF 002 
 
 
against humanity in the world."  South Africa, recalling the 
hope that an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement would be 
concluded by the end of 2008, concluded that the outlook now 
appeared "bleak."  Amb Wolff, noting the intensive U.S. 
involvement in follow-up to Annapolis, told delegates that 
these talks are the "most serious the parties have had, 
touching on all of the core issues."  He cautioned against 
mistaking the confidentiality of the talks for lack of 
progress. 
 
Engaging Extremists and Radicals 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) Continuing a theme from past Middle East debates, 
Costa Rica and Panama called explicitly for international 
engagement with Hamas, while a few other delegations 
addressed the issue in more nuanced terms.  France, while 
reiterating its call on Hamas to accept the Quartet 
conditions, said it was "ready to support any efforts to 
encourage an evolution (in Hamas's position) along these 
lines."  Russia did not advocate direct talks with Hamas, but 
cautioned the international community against blocking 
efforts towards Fatah-Hamas unity.  Indonesia also 
underscored the importance of intra-Palestinian 
reconciliation and dialogue.  Separately, most delegations 
welcomed the announcement of Israeli-Syrian peace 
negotiations brokered by Turkey.  In this regard, Russia said 
the Moscow conference could be a useful step forward, but 
that agreement between the parties was still needed. 
 
Lebanon: Support for Doha Agreement 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) All delegations welcomed the Doha Agreement signed 
by Lebanese leaders last week as well as the resulting 
election of Michel Suleiman as President of Lebanon.  Libya 
said Doha proved that the Lebanese could resolve their own 
differences if "left alone without foreign interference." 
Several delegations also emphasized that Doha must be 
implemented in full, drawing attention in particular to the 
extension of GOL control over all its territory.  Amb Wolff 
expressed confidence that Suleiman would be committed to 
upholding Lebanon's obligations under UNSCRs 1559, 1680, 
1701, and 1757.  Italy argued that Hizballah's use of force 
should not translate into political gains beyond those 
enshrined in the Doha Agreement, but cautioned that 
international criticism of just one party in Lebanon -- 
Hizballah -- could undermine intra-Lebanese dialogue. 
Although disarmament of militias is important, Italy observed 
that it should be just one part of the overall Lebanese 
political process.  In this context, it is important to 
"eliminate motivations behind Hizballah's resistance" by 
placing the Sheba'a Farms under temporary UN trusteeship. 
 
UNSC Irrelevant on the Mideast? 
------------------------------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) Costa Rica and Panama led several delegations, 
including South Africa and Italy, in bemoaning the lack of 
any Council reaction to the monthly Middle East briefings. 
If the Council is just a discussion forum on the Middle East, 
they said, what is the point of the monthly meetings?  UK 
PermRep Sawers, noting that Libya had blocked the past three 
attempts at a Council product on the Middle East, agreed that 
a monthly meeting without any outcome was unnecessary.  He 
suggested that the meetings be held every 3-4 months instead 
and that the next SC President (U.S.) consider scrapping the 
monthly meeting for June entirely.  Before other members 
could agree to Sawers's suggestion, however, Libya and South 
Africa argued that the monthly meetings are useful if only to 
"shed light" on the situation in the region, even if the 
Council cannot bring itself to agree on a statement.  In a 
subsequent meeting of Security Council coordinators, 
Indonesia expressed its strong preference for continued 
monthly meetings on the Middle East. 
Wolff